Meanwhile, the New York Times reported that "Mr. Bush has vowed to run a 'joyful' presidential campaign free from the seamier side of party politics."

Bush will run a nasty campaign during the primary, and will be an avid and eager mud-slinger. However, once he gets to the general, he will be unable to bring himself to criticize, much less play hardball, against the Democrat nominee. Just like Romney, just like McCain, just like Dole. Heck, even George W. Bush almost lost the first campaign to Al Gore because he wanted to coast and not answer the Gore campaign.

I think Walker is the strongest candidate. He has been thoroughly vetted three or four times by the entire liberal machine. Whatever there is to know about him is known and he has won on his policies and record in a blue state three times in four years.

The so-called mighty SEC West was embarrassed this bowl season...Stop scheduling directional schools, schools made up of choir boys like Incarnate Word and Presbyterian, and FBS opponents.

Over the past 10-15 years, I think your argument is all wet. This year, you can make the argument that the SEC was overrated. Nevertheless, you can make a much more persuasive argument that the Big 10 and Big 12 in particular have been consistently overrated as conferences for the last 15-20 years, perhaps longer.

Unfortunately, it does not pay for schools in the SEC to schedule tough out of conference opponents. Some of those SEC schools have never done much of that. Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, and Mississippi St, in particular, rarely have scheduled tough out of conference opponents. Occasionally they have, but not year-in and year-out. Tennessee, Florida, LSU, and probably a few others always have scheduled at least one tough non-conference opponent almost every year. Georgia has seen their out of conference schedule in recent years become much more difficult with the rise of Clemson and Georgia Tech programs. Florida always has FSU on the schedule, and occasionally has scheduled Miami.

The pressure in the SEC is to add yet another conference game - from 8 now to 9 perhaps. That will put enormous pressure on teams like Tennessee who do not have to schedule a tough out of conference opponent but do routinely (UCLA, Oregon, Oklahoma, Miami, Notre Dame, etc.). Teams like Florida and Georgia are going to want to drop FSU and Clemson, perhaps. So, unfortunately, you will probably see less games with tough out of conference opponents.

A tax will merely raise the price of a barrel of oil, no? The cost of imported oil into the US will rise which will raise prices overall. What is to keep other countries from doing the same to our oil that we export?

The difference is at the end of the day you have a well with an intrinsic worth. Yes, the small companies who are highly leveraged will have difficulty hanging on, but it is not a disaster for the industry. It may be a significant setback for the investors of the smaller company, no doubt.

Let's say you borrow $500,000 to purchase land and build a house with the intent of renting it for income. If you put 10-20% down, then you are betting at the end of the building process you will have a house and land that will appraise for $550,000 - $600,000. If you get to the end of the building process and the rental market has shifted out from under you to the tune of 30%, and the house now will command $2,400 per month instead of $3,600 per month, you have a clear choice ahead of you.

Let's say your monthly interest payment is $3,000. If you think the market will recover sooner than you run out of cash to make up the difference between your interest payment each month and the amount of cash it is producing for you ($3,000 - $2,400 = $600), you will hang on to it. If you cannot afford that, you will either try to restructure the loan. If you can't restructure, you sell at the market rate of the house - say $420,000 and pay off as much of the principal you can afford.

The house, as long as it doesn't burn, has some value. People will continue to live there, because even if the bank forecloses on you it turns around and sells it for market value to the next guy with capital.

But the analogy of debt and interest is probably half right. Usually on such speculative ventures, and oil well drilling is highly speculative, you don't finance your operations with debt. The creditors know it is speculative and will charge too high interest rates (much, much higher than interest rates for a house). I would imagine that unless an Exxon or BP is financing it with their own cash, that the smaller guys are financing by selling shares of stock. In that case, the shareholders take a valuation hit, but the company remains solvent and able to continue operations at whatever the price is. The shareholders in a position to take a long view will keep their shares, the ones that cannot will sell at the discount. But the good news is that a functional oil well, just like a functioning house, is always worth something, no?

That's why highly leveraged companies will probably not survive. Nevertheless, the shale-oil wells they created with their capital do not disappear. The investment principal is not lost. The well is not lost. Smart companies - and smart creditors - will restructure their debt to ride it out. The ones that can't will sell to larger, less-leveraged companies and pay off the debt (or as much as possible) that cannot be restructured.

It was used, the term "brothers" to mean COUSINS of Jesus or at best, step-brothers if, and this would be a big "if", Joseph was married before and was a widower.

The word Paul uses there means James was considered the Lord's biological brother. Greek is the original language of the New Testament books, and it uses a very precise Greek word for brother here -- adelphos. Adelphos means, literally, "from the same womb." There is a word for cousin in the Greek and it is anepsios. It is used in New Testament in Colossians 4:10 and translated correctly there as cousin.

While Jesus probably spoke Aramaic, that is of no consequence to this matter, since the original language of the New Testament books is Koine Greek. Also, there are times in 1st-2nd century Greek literature that adelphos can mean something more general like "mutual bond", "associates", or "countrymen", but that is always clearly borne out in the passage context. There is no context where this might be suggested in the entire New Testament.

There is also very strong extra-biblical references in Josephus' Antiquities that refers to James as the brother of Jesus: "These things happened to the Jews in requital for James the Righteous, who was a brother of Jesus, known as Christ."

I do not think she will withdraw from the race. Her ego will not let her.

Why do we expect Democrats to be rational. They are rarely analytical about these things. They are, for the most part, purely emotional. If they were more analytical, they'd be conservative or libertarian.

Desperation is setting in: she's now calling for the Senate to vote on the Keystone pipeline.

This makes no sense. Why would they vote on this now to help save one seat when they might have saved several and the Senate if they voted on it before the election? No way they will make their Senators go on record as voting for it and losing cred and money from the environmentalists when the Pubs are sure to vote for it first thing next year? It makes no sense, therefore it is nonsense.

There is an idiot in the white hut that got elected and never ran anything as an executive that got elected that couldn't wax Carson's shoes. "Community organizer" is not a real job. Carson is a real live candidate with real experience.

He's certainly more qualified than Obama, but that is hardly the standard, is it?

You guys are kidding yourselves if you think he can win. What has he run successfully as an executive? It's an honest question. He may have run several businesses and organizations and I am just unaware.

Nevertheless, we need a thoroughly vetted candidate who knows how to raise money and build an organization. Does Carson fit this bill? I'll be happy to be wrong here.

GOP has all the leverage here. Can’t see why Obama thinks he holds a winning hand. GOP has several ways they can really punish Obama with this and they will have plenty of cover for reversing it and punishing him repeatedly for the next 2 years.

How about we nominate the most conservative candidate and let them choose their own VP

Walker is conservative enough, is thoroughly vetted by the opposition over three elections, has demonstrated that he does precisely what he says he is going to do even in the face of tremendous opposition from the left and the media, and then has the ability to calmly and coolly communicate his message and record in a way that gets him elected in a blue state. What more can you reasonably want?

I would answer with “Your parents must be so proud. In fact, I’m so sure they are I have sent them a copy myself so they can see first hand what a half-million dollars or more of an Ivy League education actually is worth.”

Its unclear yet how many Republicans would actually vote to block Lynch over the issue. A number of Republicans face potentially difficult re-election bids in 2016 in blue states. And the party would be blocking the first African American woman attorney general over immigration when party leaders have professed a desire to do more to appeal to African Americans, women and Hispanics.

Baloney. GOP needs to stop being the party of fear of their own shadow. Do what's right. Frame the argument to the press, not the other way around. Stop being the reactionary party. Leave that to the Dems.

...its hard to argue against nominating a governor who has Walkers creds.

Yes. A governor you can be sure who has no skeletons in his closet that will magically appear once he starts gaining traction. This guy has been vetted several times by the labor unions throwing every single thing they have against him. All the while, he has stuck to his guns. He'd make a great candidate, imho.

There is a modern misconception that educated Europeans at the time of Columbus believed in a flat Earth, and that his voyages refuted that belief. This has been referred to as the "myth of the flat Earth." [Russell, Jeffrey B. "The Myth of the Flat Earth". American Scientific Affiliation. Retrieved March 14, 2007.]

Flat-earth was never "settled science" and accepted nearly as widely as you may have been lead to believe. So the point the OP made stands very well that saying something is "settled science" is nearly always hubris and bravado.

5. This gives Roberts permission to overturn the whole law, while not reversing his puzzling ruling from a couple of years ago. My bet is that hell embrace that opportunity. Especially since its pretty clear to anyone over the age of 5 that this law is massively destructive to our society.

The Chicago machine has something on Roberts. My guess is he will magically divine another convoluted bit of logic and "surprise" everyone yet again.

Not many and not much. She's toast. Even demonRats know this is throwing away money. She will probably have to self-finance this month. What I read is that the GOP, their 501-c advocacy groups, and the Cassidy campaign all have reserved ad time in bulk for the next month banking on the run-off. Inexplicably, Landrieu did not. So, whether she or any advocacy group decide to make a go of it, they will know it is throwing away money and that they will be paying a premium rate for ad time.